The Big Club Bias and Loftus-Cheek
Register | Edit Profile | Subscriptions | Forum Rules | Log In | RSS Feed
OhthisbloodyPC  04 Nov 17 4.01pm |
|
|---|---|
|
To be fair, scouts from McDonald's, Barclaycard, JD Sports and Coca Cola have all been to Selhurst Park to assess the merchandising potential of several Palace prospects. On the day, they weren't convinced that Palace players have the same marketing kudos as players at some of the bigger brand clubs, like Chelsea, Arsenal and the Manchester Globetrotters. Dann needs to convince them he can market replica shirts and premium rate disposables to gullible kids. Not just in SE25 but in all the major UK and overseas markets. We have to be realistic. Palace aren't a global corporate brand. All we need to do is sell our soul (nobody owns a soul any more, it's cheaper to outsource one from an offshore tax haven) and invest the money in a multi media marketing campaign. Stanley Matthews is dead. They don't have laces in footballs any more. As Terry Venables said: they used to play on grass!
|
|
 Alert a moderator to this post |
 |
 Dan1994 Wallington 04 Nov 17 4.17pm |
  |
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by EverybodyDannsNow
You've backed yourself into a corner and are now frantically trying to defend it - using random WhoScored statistics is just clutching at straws. There's always going to be some justification you can come up with as to why certain players are selected, but the facts are that one third of the squad comes from outside the top six - this is more than a reasonable amount IMO. Out of interest, who do you think should have been included in the squad who hasn't? So being asked to look at it objectively, then providing statistics from a credible source counts as backing into a corner? You can also justify who would be kept in, such as Wilshere and Sturridge. It's not a third though, 3 on loan players (realised Hart is still a City player) (all top 6 players), so that's a fifth. I've already been over how 4 of those five are borderline impossible not to include in the squad. For me, Heaton over Hart, Lascelles over Gomez and Gray/Townsend of Lingard. If the England team had all top 6 players who'd made it there on merit, then I wouldn't care. But the I think some of the fringe players are chosen based on their club rather than actual merit. Edited by Dan1994 (04 Nov 2017 4.20pm)
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
 |
| EverybodyDannsNow SE19 04 Nov 17 7.06pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Dan1994
So being asked to look at it objectively, then providing statistics from a credible source counts as backing into a corner? You can also justify who would be kept in, such as Wilshere and Sturridge. It's not a third though, 3 on loan players (realised Hart is still a City player) (all top 6 players), so that's a fifth. I've already been over how 4 of those five are borderline impossible not to include in the squad. For me, Heaton over Hart, Lascelles over Gomez and Gray/Townsend of Lingard. If the England team had all top 6 players who'd made it there on merit, then I wouldn't care. But the I think some of the fringe players are chosen based on their club rather than actual merit. Edited by Dan1994 (04 Nov 2017 4.20pm) 'Key passes' and 'fouls' are hardly telling statistics though - trying to define what constitutes a key pass alone is sketchy at best. It's certainly not convincing in comparing players , particularly when you were so quick to dismiss goals and assists. Hart isn't playing for a top 6 club, and Heaton is injured, so that's a bit redundant. Gomez' inclusion has more to do with his versatility I suspect - he has never been deployed much as a centre back at club football, so comparing him and Lascelles is difficult. The Lingard question is certainly tighter, more so with Gray than Townsend - Townsend has been pretty unimpressive in the year and a bit he's been here, admittedly not helped by playing in an underperforming side, but his personal contribution hasn't been particularly impressive. Lingard has made an impact for England previously, particularly off the bench in the recent qualifiers, so I still think it's justifiable that he edges Gray. I think your overarching point has certainly been true in England's recent history, but I think they've been reasonably open minded in the last few squads.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Dan1994 Wallington 05 Nov 17 11.04am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by EverybodyDannsNow
'Key passes' and 'fouls' are hardly telling statistics though - trying to define what constitutes a key pass alone is sketchy at best. It's certainly not convincing in comparing players , particularly when you were so quick to dismiss goals and assists. Hart isn't playing for a top 6 club, and Heaton is injured, so that's a bit redundant. Gomez' inclusion has more to do with his versatility I suspect - he has never been deployed much as a centre back at club football, so comparing him and Lascelles is difficult. The Lingard question is certainly tighter, more so with Gray than Townsend - Townsend has been pretty unimpressive in the year and a bit he's been here, admittedly not helped by playing in an underperforming side, but his personal contribution hasn't been particularly impressive. Lingard has made an impact for England previously, particularly off the bench in the recent qualifiers, so I still think it's justifiable that he edges Gray. I think your overarching point has certainly been true in England's recent history, but I think they've been reasonably open minded in the last few squads. Key passes are pretty well defined, and similar, if not the same, throughout any proper football statistics site. They are defined as the final pass before a shot. So in theory, Townsend produces more chances and wins more free kicks. They were just examples, but my point was that looking at it objectively, the only things Lingard is better at is controlling the ball (first touch) and keeping possession. Obviously, context plays a big importance as well, and both can have cases in that sense: we play a much more direct, counter-attacking type of play, whilst Man Utd will tend to close out games when Lingard is likely to be playing (off the bench at the end). It's not a full-proof science by any stretch of the imagination, but you can begin to picture what they are like as a player. Hart is on loan from Man City, and I realised Heaton was injured when watching SSN yesterday. So, I'd probably keep him. Yeah possibly, as not including him would mean only potential 4 CBs. But then (possible unpopular opinion), but I don't know how Ben Mee hasn't been in contention for a place despite being statistically better than Keane and carrying on that form to this season. I don't remember Jesse Lingard making any real impact for me in any qualifiers. I agree that it has become better, but I think that will pale away once it gets to the World Cup, and we will be selecting the same old. For me, this is more of a frustration of England than anything else. In an ideal world, our whole squad would play for the best clubs in the world a la Spain or Germany.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Goldfiinger Just down the road 05 Nov 17 3.30pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Its shocking, one week he picks big club players that don't get in their first team.. He gets slammed for it and now he does what... He picks the big club kids that have played a handful of games on loan, and done nothing special. Complete bulls***.... I hope he gets called out over it. No way these players have earned a call up yet.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
Login / Register
All images and text on this site are copyright © 1999-2023 The Holmesdale Online, unless otherwise stated.
Web Design by Guntrisoft Ltd.